«epiloghi in cielo» (Mahler, III Symphony, Pestelli)

Hi Luca.

Pestelli follows in the footsteps of musicologists - among whom is also Quirino Principe - who in the last movement of the Third do not see so much a "What God tells me" - the phrase is quoted from a letter dated July 1, 1896 - but - in the words of Principe - "What I tell myself", as in this last movement "in the blatant contemplation of himself, Mahler accomplishes, here and elsewhere, what each of us should forbid ourselves: he judges himself, and absolves himself. Along this path, he will move away from the sphere of the Wunderhorn."

The Wunderhorn is dominated by the excluded, the humiliated, the astonished but not vengeful; and from this series of poems, Mahler will derive as many as 22 lieder, including those from the Second, Third, and Fourth Symphonies. In his finale of the Third, however, the protagonist is only the composer with all his most intimate self.

hi Daniele

thank you for this clarification on the views of Pestelli and Quirino Principe. You know how much esteem I have for both of them. The words you reported - "what I narrate to myself" - are truly interesting to me: to say how much I am "in disagreement" and how much I am, at the same time, deeply in agreement.

I disagree for the very banal fact that - everyone thinks what they believe - to me this finale of Mahler's Third seems to have succeeded really well as an epilogue in heaven.

In any case, I am very much in tune with the ideas of our two musicologists. First of all (but that is not the most important thing) I approve of the freedom that Q. Principe takes in judging such a final Adagio from a perspective totally reversed compared to the one his author suggested. A work is always something "more" than the intentions of its author, and, in this sense, Massimo Mila had already written clearly regarding the unconscious nature of artistic expression.

But what I care most to affirm is that, yes: "what I narrate to myself" I also think is the truest perspective with which to approach this music. But I would extend this way of seeing to any of the most "spiritual" pieces of any other composer.

As one might say: if there is a dialogue with God (if there is), it is in the depths of everyone's soul.

This Hindu legend comes to mind

http://www.sahajayogatoscana.it/storie_racconti/divinita.asp

. . . explains much better what I have tried to say

Stunning "The divinity in man".

Thank you!

We come then to what I think about this last movement of Mahler's Third Symphony.

From a purely musical point of view, I would say there is nothing to object to: it is a delight for the ears and, this regardless of the spirituality, the heaven, and the intimacy it emanates.

From the point of view of what Mahler manages to convey to me, I would add a second variation on his explicitly expressed intent—a variation that obviously does not exclude the original or that expressed by Principe but goes to complete it—and that is "What love for Music can do for me"—and through me, for all humanity.

Why do I assert this?

Those who know how to analyze this piece, starting from very deep musical knowledge, note that it is substantially artificial.

Artificial in the sense that Mahler manages to insert references ranging from the slow tempo of Beethoven's Quartet Opus 135 to appearances that recall Richard Strauss's Vier letzte Lieder, to much Wagner and Bruckner, to Weber's Clarinet Quintet Opus 34 and—to top it all off—to the first act of Verdi's Otello, all seasoned with a very sweet self-complacency—and this is what Principe does not like, defining it as "sugary."

Mahler's Symphony No. 3 can be compared to Beethoven's Pastoral because both speak of Nature. But if for Beethoven Nature is Mother, for Mahler nature is a stepmother and, the only way of salvation and love, man can find it through Music and... Art.

And,,, thus once again we enter into the saving power of Music and Art!

danielescarpetti wrote:

Anyone who knows how to analyze this piece, starting from very deep musical knowledge, notes that it is substantially artificial.

Artificial in the sense that Mahler manages to insert references ranging from the slow movement of Beethoven's Quartet Opus 135 to semblance that recall Richard Strauss's Vier letzte Lieder, to much Wagner and Bruckner, to Weber's Clarinet Quintet Opus 34 and - dulcis in fundo - to the 1st act of Verdi's Otello, all seasoned with a very sweet self-complacency—and this is what Principe dislikes, defining it as "sugary."

'Artificial', generally speaking, is not a compliment

Although I don't think you used it with a negative meaning, given the terms in which you speak of Mahler's Third in general.

your idea about the finale is also interesting. personally, I find it shareable and, as you say, it does not exclude the others.

How interesting the parallel with the Pastoral is, given the leitmotif.

Anyway, I could never have expressed such a judgment: of all those works you cited that Mahler inserts as references, there isn't one that I have listened to even once. Except for the Lento assai of Beethoven's op. 135

(but upon first listening, the one I do without having read anything, I didn't notice it)

LucaCavaliere wrote:

'Artifact', generally speaking, is not a compliment

Even though I don't think you used it with a negative meaning, given the terms in which you speak of Mahler's Third in general.

Yes, obviously Luca.

By 'Artifact', one can mean either something made with artifice — certainly a negative connotation — or something that derives from an intentional transformative process carried out by man and, in this case, one must judge the result, which can be positive or negative.

.

My reference is to the second meaning and for me the result is positive ... but evidently it is not so for everyone!

thanks for the further confirmation Daniele

there is one more thing I wanted to ask you: could you tell me where you were able to read those thoughts by Q. Principe regarding Mahler's Third?

Whether it's a book or an article, I would gladly read it. Especially if there is other content regarding Mahler's work.

This is the biography and critical analysis of the works titled "Mahler. Music between Eros and Thanatos" Bompiani Pocket editions. A volume of 1030 pages ... for a pocket edition - only - !

Well, why don't you have a pocket like that, Daniele!?!?

antares86 wrote:

Well, why don't you have a pocket like that, Daniele!?!?

I'm not Eta Beta!

danielescarpetti wrote:

This is the biography and critical analysis of the works titled "Mahler. Music between Eros and Thanatos" Bompiani Pocket books. A volume of 1030 pages ... for a pocket book - only -!

thanks! very interesting!